Captain Marvel or How Marvel does everything better than everyone else

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

I didn't like Ragnarock very much. Its a good movie, but I honestly thought it was the weakest of all the Thor movies. Very...Hot Topicy...
Anything in this movie that I need to know for Avengers or its it kinda Ant Man like where I can skip it and the character just appears?

Silentpony:
I didn't like Ragnarock very much. Its a good movie, but I honestly thought it was the weakest of all the Thor movies. Very...Hot Topicy...
Anything in this movie that I need to know for Avengers or its it kinda Ant Man like where I can skip it and the character just appears?

It explains Fury's connection to her, and there is an Avengers after-credits. There is also an after-after credits, but honestly, its reasonable to skip it.

I wasn't hyped for this movie at all. But I ended up loving every second of it. What a wonderful ride.

Casual Shinji:
Can't say anything in the trailer made it look like anything other than another generic Marvel movie. Like with Black Panther I'm glad that a specific group that is underrepresented in these movies finally gets some representation, but that doesn't stop it from looking utterly bland. I'll just be over there waiting for Shazam and Brightburn.

As someone who agrees with the statement that Black Panther was bland, I suggest you go see this one. It's really fun.

Saelune:
*I am talking the new age versions, ie the shitty JJ Abrams ones.

...Is that really a high bar, though? It's kind of like saying that you beat up the deaf, dumb, and blind kid in the wheelchair.

Saelune:

*I am talking the new age versions, ie the shitty JJ Abrams ones.

...oooooooh, that makes waay more sense now.

Glad you enjoyed the movie.

I loved it. It's more Marvel, but I enjoy the "Marvel Formula", so that isn't an issue for me. It definitely isn't among the best Marvel has to offer, but as far as Origin stories go it's pretty good. Brie Larson does an amazing job bringing Carol Danvers to the big screen. Fury is fucking great as usual. I'm positive one specific scene will be divisive as fuck. I thought it was hilarious, but I understand why people expecting something more serious would be disappointed. All in all, it was a fun time. Also, Goose is adorable as hell.

Neurotic Void Melody:
Brie Larson is always appreciated, so is the 70s and 90s, on these little basis I was already sold. Apparently Brie said some stuff that made the tinterweb manbabies have a shit fit, no idea what it was but can only imagine it involved white genocide or some crap. Can't help but wonder if they put the same bitter energy towards Mel Gibson's output too.

oh yeah, a cute kittie cat certainly helps, for sure. but I will be sorely disappointed if it doesn't have a heroic moment somewhere

Brie Larson:
"I don't need a 40-year-old white dude to tell me what didn't work about A Wrinkle in Time. It wasn't made for him! I want to know what it meant to women of color, biracial women, to teen women of color. Am I saying I hate white dudes? No, I am not. What I am saying is if you make a movie that is a love letter to women of color, there is an insanely low chance a woman of color will have a chance to see your movie, and review your movie. It really sucks that reviews matter - but reviews matter. Good reviews out of festivals give small, independent films a fighting chance to be bought and seen. Good reviews help films gross money, good reviews slingshot films into awards contenders. A good review can change your life. It changed mine."

http://time.com/5312618/brie-larson-women-in-film/

This is the bad, awful thing she said. I understand why a white guy with a victim-complex would take offense. After all she's asking for diversity! Ugh!

Adam Jensen:

Casual Shinji:
Can't say anything in the trailer made it look like anything other than another generic Marvel movie. Like with Black Panther I'm glad that a specific group that is underrepresented in these movies finally gets some representation, but that doesn't stop it from looking utterly bland. I'll just be over there waiting for Shazam and Brightburn.

As someone who agrees with the statement that Black Panther was bland, I suggest you go see this one. It's really fun.

Anything is possible. I mean, I just saw Venom and I actually kinda liked that, so who knows.

Here Comes Tomorrow:

I hope Marvel can get the X-Men rights back after Dark Phoenix bombs so we can see Rogue steal her powers.

I...actually don't think Dark Phoenix is going to bomb.

Captain Marvelous:
I loved it. It's more Marvel, but I enjoy the "Marvel Formula", so that isn't an issue for me. It definitely isn't among the best Marvel has to offer, but as far as Origin stories go it's pretty good. Brie Larson does an amazing job bringing Carol Danvers to the big screen. Fury is fucking great as usual. I'm positive one specific scene will be divisive as fuck. I thought it was hilarious, but I understand why people expecting something more serious would be disappointed. All in all, it was a fun time. Also, Goose is adorable as hell.

[quote=Brie Larson]"I don't need a 40-year-old white dude to tell me what didn't work about A Wrinkle in Time. It wasn't made for him! I want to know what it meant to women of color, biracial women, to teen women of color. Am I saying I hate white dudes? No, I am not. What I am saying is if you make a movie that is a love letter to women of color, there is an insanely low chance a woman of color will have a chance to see your movie, and review your movie. It really sucks that reviews matter - but reviews matter. Good reviews out of festivals give small, independent films a fighting chance to be bought and seen. Good reviews help films gross money, good reviews slingshot films into awards contenders. A good review can change your life. It changed mine."

There's another quote where she goes into movie critic statistics, but while I'm not "insulted" by the comments, I have to be honest that they still bug me. Not because of the race stuff, but the whole "it's not meant for you" argument.

The problem is this argument's been used before, it was stupid then, and it was stupid now, the idea that any criticism of a piece of work can be dismissed under the basis that "it wasn't meant for you" (usually this is replaced with the "it was made for the fans" excuse). I'm not denying that there's pieces of media that will appeal to some groups more than others, but the idea that only the catered-for group's opinion matters is a pretty dire one. Off the top of my head, by this logic, anyone who isn't British, male, straight, and white can't possibly have an opinion on James Bond, who, at the end of the day, is a power fantasy for this group. Those outside the intended group have every right to have and express an opinion on the Bond films/books however.

Hawki:

Here Comes Tomorrow:

I hope Marvel can get the X-Men rights back after Dark Phoenix bombs so we can see Rogue steal her powers.

I...actually don't think Dark Phoenix is going to bomb.

Sansa Stark is going to make it or break it. Like, the movie comes out in June while the last episodes of GoT air in May. Whatever happens to Sansa could totally be a distraction when trying to watch the "Dark Stark Saga" later in theaters.

Hawki:

The problem is this argument's been used before, it was stupid then, and it was stupid now, the idea that any criticism of a piece of work can be dismissed under the basis that "it wasn't meant for you" (usually this is replaced with the "it was made for the fans" excuse). I'm not denying that there's pieces of media that will appeal to some groups more than others, but the idea that only the catered-for group's opinion matters is a pretty dire one. Off the top of my head, by this logic, anyone who isn't British, male, straight, and white can't possibly have an opinion on James Bond, who, at the end of the day, is a power fantasy for this group. Those outside the intended group have every right to have and express an opinion on the Bond films/books however.

She didn't say criticism from a particular group is dismissable. More like, there's a particular insight that different people bring when critiquing. A cis critic and a trans critic will likely have different takes on Rocky Picture Horror Show. A straight critic and a gay critic may have different takes on But I'm a Cheerleader. The point isn't to knock down white male critics but to uplift women, people of color, and lgbtq+ critics so that the conversation isn't dominated by a single group that potentially doesn't understand or appreciate what it does.

Silentpony:
I didn't like Ragnarock very much. Its a good movie, but I honestly thought it was the weakest of all the Thor movies. Very...Hot Topicy...
Anything in this movie that I need to know for Avengers or its it kinda Ant Man like where I can skip it and the character just appears?

How can anything be weak compared to dark world

undeadsuitor:

Silentpony:
I didn't like Ragnarock very much. Its a good movie, but I honestly thought it was the weakest of all the Thor movies. Very...Hot Topicy...
Anything in this movie that I need to know for Avengers or its it kinda Ant Man like where I can skip it and the character just appears?

How can anything be weak compared to dark world

Because Thor was supposed to be the overly dramatic Shakespearen hero, the one all Alas and Alack! Ragnarock was just Guardians 3. It had a fucking rock sound track. Dark World may not be the best movie, but at least its trying to do its own thing, not just pretending to be another, more popular movie.

Saelune:

Samtemdo8:

Saelune:
Just got back from seeing it, and I am honestly surprised how much I fucking just loved it. Seriously, plus this movie does Star Wars, Star Trek, and even Superman better than Star Wars, Star Trek and Superman.

image

*I am talking the new age versions, ie the shitty JJ Abrams ones.

You really, really should have specified that. Literally everyone read that as you just shitting over the entire spectrum of those franchises.

Neurotic Void Melody:
Brie Larson is always appreciated, so is the 70s and 90s, on these little basis I was already sold. Apparently Brie said some stuff that made the tinterweb manbabies have a shit fit, no idea what it was but can only imagine it involved white genocide or some crap. Can't help but wonder if they put the same bitter energy towards Mel Gibson's output too.

oh yeah, a cute kittie cat certainly helps, for sure. but I will be sorely disappointed if it doesn't have a heroic moment somewhere

She said something along the lines of the movie not being made for white men while being smug and shaking her head in an annoying angle or some such.

I'll be glad to prove her wrong! :P

She later was apparently pressured by her publicist into walking these comments back somewhat with a tepid "I just wanna include more people not restrict some" and whatnot platitude. Though all that stuff is kinda noise when talking about the movie. It's all about the personality of the actress and her politics and whatnot. Completely unimportant stuff when in the context of a fictional story.

Dreiko:

Neurotic Void Melody:
Brie Larson is always appreciated, so is the 70s and 90s, on these little basis I was already sold. Apparently Brie said some stuff that made the tinterweb manbabies have a shit fit, no idea what it was but can only imagine it involved white genocide or some crap. Can't help but wonder if they put the same bitter energy towards Mel Gibson's output too.

oh yeah, a cute kittie cat certainly helps, for sure. but I will be sorely disappointed if it doesn't have a heroic moment somewhere

She said something along the lines of the movie not being made for white men while being smug and shaking her head in an annoying angle or some such.

I'll be glad to prove her wrong! :P

She later was apparently pressured by her publicist into walking these comments back somewhat with a tepid "I just wanna include more people not restrict some" and whatnot platitude. Though all that stuff is kinda noise when talking about the movie. It's all about the personality of the actress and her politics and whatnot. Completely unimportant stuff when in the context of a fictional story.

The quote is earlier in this thread. Pretty much says, "I want to hear from not just white 40 year old guys." Which, of course, should be offensive to anyone.

Could have she worded it nicer so it doesn't trigger white guys? Sure. Hence her point about not trying to exclude them later.

As a person who is 'targeted' by Larsen? People being offended are just making mountains out of molehills. It's like when you called her smug. Because smug now seems to mean 'I dont like what their saying' rather than a facial expression.

Neurotic Void Melody:
Brie Larson is always appreciated, so is the 70s and 90s, on these little basis I was already sold. Apparently Brie said some stuff that made the tinterweb manbabies have a shit fit, no idea what it was but can only imagine it involved white genocide or some crap. Can't help but wonder if they put the same bitter energy towards Mel Gibson's output too.

oh yeah, a cute kittie cat certainly helps, for sure. but I will be sorely disappointed if it doesn't have a heroic moment somewhere

It gets a couple in the end.

trunkage:

Dreiko:

Neurotic Void Melody:
Brie Larson is always appreciated, so is the 70s and 90s, on these little basis I was already sold. Apparently Brie said some stuff that made the tinterweb manbabies have a shit fit, no idea what it was but can only imagine it involved white genocide or some crap. Can't help but wonder if they put the same bitter energy towards Mel Gibson's output too.

oh yeah, a cute kittie cat certainly helps, for sure. but I will be sorely disappointed if it doesn't have a heroic moment somewhere

She said something along the lines of the movie not being made for white men while being smug and shaking her head in an annoying angle or some such.

I'll be glad to prove her wrong! :P

She later was apparently pressured by her publicist into walking these comments back somewhat with a tepid "I just wanna include more people not restrict some" and whatnot platitude. Though all that stuff is kinda noise when talking about the movie. It's all about the personality of the actress and her politics and whatnot. Completely unimportant stuff when in the context of a fictional story.

The quote is earlier in this thread. Pretty much says, "I want to hear from not just white 40 year old guys." Which, of course, should be offensive to anyone.

Could have she worded it nicer so it doesn't trigger white guys? Sure. Hence her point about not trying to exclude them later.

As a person who is 'targeted' by Larsen? People being offended are just making mountains out of molehills. It's like when you called her smug. Because smug now seems to mean 'I dont like what their saying' rather than a facial expression.

I'm not entirely certain that is the same quote I had in mind but either way it's less about facial expression and more about uhh, neck movement, I guess?

Point mainly is that this is just the actress' own personality that's abrasive and it has little to do with the movie. Sure, it was in connection to the movie, but it's unfair to blame the movie that has a ton of people working on it cause this one actress behaves the way she does. I can see blaming her all you want but you can't apply her flaws to the fictional world of the movie or even to the character that she portrays because that world is governed by the writers so she can say she hates white men or whatever but if the writer writes her into a neonazi concubine in the next one her character will morph into that irrespective of whatever her feelings on white men are. Even if she were to refuse to play that character and they got someone else to do it it'd still be the same character.

Separate art from the artist and judge works in a vacuum, that's the only fair approach.

Squilookle:

Saelune:
*I am talking the new age versions, ie the shitty JJ Abrams ones.

You really, really should have specified that. Literally everyone read that as you just shitting over the entire spectrum of those franchises.

Literally is a bold word to use. I don't disagree I could have been more clear, but I really doubt literally is the proper word here.

trunkage:

Dreiko:

Neurotic Void Melody:
Brie Larson is always appreciated, so is the 70s and 90s, on these little basis I was already sold. Apparently Brie said some stuff that made the tinterweb manbabies have a shit fit, no idea what it was but can only imagine it involved white genocide or some crap. Can't help but wonder if they put the same bitter energy towards Mel Gibson's output too.

oh yeah, a cute kittie cat certainly helps, for sure. but I will be sorely disappointed if it doesn't have a heroic moment somewhere

She said something along the lines of the movie not being made for white men while being smug and shaking her head in an annoying angle or some such.

I'll be glad to prove her wrong! :P

She later was apparently pressured by her publicist into walking these comments back somewhat with a tepid "I just wanna include more people not restrict some" and whatnot platitude. Though all that stuff is kinda noise when talking about the movie. It's all about the personality of the actress and her politics and whatnot. Completely unimportant stuff when in the context of a fictional story.

The quote is earlier in this thread. Pretty much says, "I want to hear from not just white 40 year old guys." Which, of course, should be offensive to anyone.

Could have she worded it nicer so it doesn't trigger white guys? Sure. Hence her point about not trying to exclude them later.

As a person who is 'targeted' by Larsen? People being offended are just making mountains out of molehills. It's like when you called her smug. Because smug now seems to mean 'I dont like what their saying' rather than a facial expression.

She could have worded it nicer. Doesn't mean she should. Standing up to bullies is a good thing. With all the intentional misinformation going around about this movie, clearly she was very justified. Sexism is as popular as ever.

Okay, real talk here:

The reason Disney is under constant attack by reactionaries doesn't have anything to do with their movies, their quality or their marketing. Disney is a fairly conservative company and always has been. The reason these reactionaries keep attacking Disney is because many Jews work there. In their eyes Disney is a Jewish company which is why it needs to be attacked.

That, for that matter, is the reason for most rightist attacks on the film industry in general. Not any concrete connection the industry has to their boogeyman of Cultural Marxism. Which, for the record, also means "anything involving jewish people"

Silentpony:

undeadsuitor:

Silentpony:
I didn't like Ragnarock very much. Its a good movie, but I honestly thought it was the weakest of all the Thor movies. Very...Hot Topicy...
Anything in this movie that I need to know for Avengers or its it kinda Ant Man like where I can skip it and the character just appears?

How can anything be weak compared to dark world

Because Thor was supposed to be the overly dramatic Shakespearen hero, the one all Alas and Alack! Ragnarock was just Guardians 3. It had a fucking rock sound track. Dark World may not be the best movie, but at least its trying to do its own thing, not just pretending to be another, more popular movie.

I mean....I guess? Dark World is uniquely unwatchable I'll give it that.

Personally I'd love more ensemble pieces outside the usual team up movies like Ragnarok more often.

So, I saw it today. I'll give a full review in the "last movie you watched" thread later, but short thoughts:

-It's fine. It's okay. Fight scenes are terrible, but there's enough humour and, at times, depth, to keep me invested most of the time. There's a great plot twist I didn't see coming, but the film really struggles to stick the landing.

-What happened to Goose after this film?

-Of the now 16 MCU films I've seen, this takes the #10 spot.

-Seriously, End Game - you have to explain Goose. Where's Goose? Gimme Goose!

PsychedelicDiamond:
Okay, real talk here:

The reason Disney is under constant attack by reactionaries doesn't have anything to do with their movies, their quality or their marketing. Disney is a fairly conservative company and always has been. The reason these reactionaries keep attacking Disney is because many Jews work there. In their eyes Disney is a Jewish company which is why it needs to be attacked.

That, for that matter, is the reason for most rightist attacks on the film industry in general. Not any concrete connection the industry has to their boogeyman of Cultural Marxism. Which, for the record, also means "anything involving jewish people"

Blue pills, red pills... What the hell do they call the one you took?

PsychedelicDiamond:
Okay, real talk here:

The reason Disney is under constant attack by reactionaries doesn't have anything to do with their movies, their quality or their marketing. Disney is a fairly conservative company and always has been. The reason these reactionaries keep attacking Disney is because many Jews work there. In their eyes Disney is a Jewish company which is why it needs to be attacked.

That, for that matter, is the reason for most rightist attacks on the film industry in general. Not any concrete connection the industry has to their boogeyman of Cultural Marxism. Which, for the record, also means "anything involving jewish people"

. Stuff like Kingdom Hearts has been pretty universally loved or at least liked though. Do Japanese people cancel out the jews?

Captain Marvelous:
She didn't say criticism from a particular group is dismissable.

She just dismissed criticism from an entire group by definition. As in:

X: I have an opinion on A.

Y: I have no interest in the opinion of X on A.

What is that if not dismissal?

And, yeah, this argument bugs me. It's always bugged me well before Brie Larson opened her mouth. I've seen this idea tossed around in numerous forms, though usually it's along the lines of "it was made for the fans" or "if you don't like it, why watch it?" Usually, it's a way of trying to dismiss any criticism without having to actually engage in that criticism. The latter arguably bothers me any more, because if you make something that's crap, and defend it with "it's for the fans," then by insinuation, your fans are happy lapping up crap.

More like, there's a particular insight that different people bring when critiquing. A cis critic and a trans critic will likely have different takes on Rocky Picture Horror Show. A straight critic and a gay critic may have different takes on But I'm a Cheerleader.

Um, yes? I'm not disputing that.

The point isn't to knock down white male critics but to uplift women, people of color, and lgbtq+ critics so that the conversation isn't dominated by a single group that potentially doesn't understand or appreciate what it does.

I know that's not the point per se - Larson made the point in a separate statement when she gave statistics on the demographics of film critics. However, again, it's effectively falling into the same fallacy:

X: I don't like A.

Y: It wasn't made for X. I want to know what Z thinks about A.

If we're really entertaining the idea that critique of art becomes more or less valid in sync with the identity/lack of it of the person reviewing it, then ultimately, the act of critique is worthless.

Also, it's telling that A Wrinkle in Time is the film being used as an example, said film being a box office bomb, and panned by critics and fans alike. Maybe the film just wasn't that good? Like, the whole "critics are out of touch" argument is conspicuously nowhere to be seen when critics and fans align. Apparently "the critics are out of touch, except when they agree with me" is the true message being imparted.

Captain Marvelous:
I loved it. It's more Marvel, but I enjoy the "Marvel Formula", so that isn't an issue for me. It definitely isn't among the best Marvel has to offer, but as far as Origin stories go it's pretty good. Brie Larson does an amazing job bringing Carol Danvers to the big screen. Fury is fucking great as usual. I'm positive one specific scene will be divisive as fuck. I thought it was hilarious, but I understand why people expecting something more serious would be disappointed. All in all, it was a fun time. Also, Goose is adorable as hell.

Brie Larson:
"I don't need a 40-year-old white dude to tell me what didn't work about A Wrinkle in Time. It wasn't made for him! I want to know what it meant to women of color, biracial women, to teen women of color. Am I saying I hate white dudes? No, I am not. What I am saying is if you make a movie that is a love letter to women of color, there is an insanely low chance a woman of color will have a chance to see your movie, and review your movie. It really sucks that reviews matter - but reviews matter. Good reviews out of festivals give small, independent films a fighting chance to be bought and seen. Good reviews help films gross money, good reviews slingshot films into awards contenders. A good review can change your life. It changed mine."

http://time.com/5312618/brie-larson-women-in-film/

This is the bad, awful thing she said. I understand why a white guy with a victim-complex would take offense. After all she's asking for diversity! Ugh!

Oh wow, that is pretty damn tame, exceptionally mild. As a sort of member of said demographic, am not feeling attacked at all, like... I would need to do some serious reaching and misinterpretation to extract anything resembling personal offence there. *Sigh* increasingly regretting subjecting myself to internet culture these days as whenever anything even slightly progressive appears, the first emotional reaction isn't positivity, but dread as the mind instantly cycles through all those internet manbabies predicted vitriol towards it, each and every selfish bitter reaction. Now, the positivity is second to the anticipation of insular assholes everywhere, like ringing echoes of ignorance validating each other through incessant vocal platforming, preying on those with low self-esteem and minimal understanding of societal issues. Then again, a biological tendency for taking in and being unable to ignore intense negativity probably contributes a lot to that, so it's probably a personal issues in that regard.

Johnny Novgorod:
It gets a couple in the end.

Ooooh, a rare moment of hope that isn't a joke for once ;)

Neurotic Void Melody:

Johnny Novgorod:
It gets a couple in the end.

Ooooh, a rare moment of hope that isn't a joke for once ;)

Well, it's heroism AND a joke in that it's played off as one. Let's call it Baby Groot heroism.

PsychedelicDiamond:
Okay, real talk here:

The reason Disney is under constant attack by reactionaries doesn't have anything to do with their movies, their quality or their marketing. Disney is a fairly conservative company and always has been. The reason these reactionaries keep attacking Disney is because many Jews work there. In their eyes Disney is a Jewish company which is why it needs to be attacked.

That, for that matter, is the reason for most rightist attacks on the film industry in general. Not any concrete connection the industry has to their boogeyman of Cultural Marxism. Which, for the record, also means "anything involving jewish people"

Wow. I need to dig into leftist conspiracy theories more.

Here Comes Tomorrow:

PsychedelicDiamond:
Okay, real talk here:

The reason Disney is under constant attack by reactionaries doesn't have anything to do with their movies, their quality or their marketing. Disney is a fairly conservative company and always has been. The reason these reactionaries keep attacking Disney is because many Jews work there. In their eyes Disney is a Jewish company which is why it needs to be attacked.

That, for that matter, is the reason for most rightist attacks on the film industry in general. Not any concrete connection the industry has to their boogeyman of Cultural Marxism. Which, for the record, also means "anything involving jewish people"

Wow. I need to dig into leftist conspiracy theories more.

Oh, come on. Just read the discussion around Captain Marvel or practically any new Star Wars movie and count how many times (((some person))) does that cute little "triple brackets" thing rightists use to mark the names of people or companies they think are jewish.

PsychedelicDiamond:

Here Comes Tomorrow:

PsychedelicDiamond:
Okay, real talk here:

The reason Disney is under constant attack by reactionaries doesn't have anything to do with their movies, their quality or their marketing. Disney is a fairly conservative company and always has been. The reason these reactionaries keep attacking Disney is because many Jews work there. In their eyes Disney is a Jewish company which is why it needs to be attacked.

That, for that matter, is the reason for most rightist attacks on the film industry in general. Not any concrete connection the industry has to their boogeyman of Cultural Marxism. Which, for the record, also means "anything involving jewish people"

Wow. I need to dig into leftist conspiracy theories more.

Oh, come on. Just read the discussion around Captain Marvel or practically any new Star Wars movie and count how many times (((some person))) does that cute little "triple brackets" thing rightists use to mark the names of people or companies they think are jewish.

Compelling evidence indeed.

Just got back from watching it, and it was alright. It was nice to see an origin marvel movie that strayed from the formula, but in the process some of the new things they tried out didn't really work very well. While i liked Jude Law's character, the movie's attempt to subvert the traditional rivalry backstory just makes him feel pointless. When Carol says "I have been fighting with a hand tied behind my back the whole time" i was kind of mift. She beat Jude Law in their first fight by using her energy powers, so she is shown as stronger and more important than him from the beginning. If they had merged the supreme intelligence and his character in some way, it might have made for a more effective antagonist, even if it means removing Jude Law from the movie. The final 'fight' between him and Carol just hammers it home further. The movie might subvert a trope by not killing him off or have her fistfight him, but as a result he feels pointless. It may be tiresome for the hero to always fight someone with the same power as them, but Loke, Ironmonger, Bucky Barnes, Killmonger and Quill's dad feel more meaningful when they actually pose a threat. While we are on the subject of other marvel villains, the whole "Without us you are just human" moment worked much better in guardians 2 because the movie took more time to set up character relationships, which this movie has a general problem with. Carol and Marie's relationship would have felt more meaningful if the few flashbacks we got focused on the two of them a bit more rather than a bunch of faceless mysoginists knocking Carol down over and over so that we could have that multiple standing up scene at the end. The message was clear with the airforce rope scene which was the best one. All the childhood shots just makes it look like a commercial for 30 seconds.

The inclusion of Ronan was overall a bad decision in my opinion. He couldn't die or be defeated in this movie because he had to be in Guardians later in the timeline, but by having Carol destroy one of his ships in 30 seconds it feels like the only reason the plot of Guardians 1 happened was that Captain Marvel couldn't spare another 2 minutes to take out Ronans entire fleet there and then. His body count in the final battle of Guardians 1 alone is higher than that of this entire movie, and if Captain Marvel cared that much about hers, maybe she should have though of that before destroying two entire space ships full of crew, one of which was filled with Skrulls. Speaking of the Skrulls, the movie has a similar problem to TFA's problem with storm troopers. We are asked to sympathise with them later in the movie, but at the start they act completely like villains, and this behavious, coupled with the ammount of Skrulls Captain Marvel killed in the first half are never really re-examined the way it feels like they should have been

It was an overall enjoyable movie, even if its attempts to stand out from the rest of its type kind of backfired at times

Silentpony:
Anything in this movie that I need to know for Avengers or its it kinda Ant Man like where I can skip it and the character just appears?

You get a backstory to the "Avengers" name and Carol's precise connection to Fury (ie. they teamed up in 1995). Also one of the Infinity Stones shows up for a wink. That's about it.

CyanCat47:
The inclusion of Ronan was overall a bad decision in my opinion. He couldn't die or be defeated in this movie because he had to be in Guardians later in the timeline, but by having Carol destroy one of his ships in 30 seconds it feels like the only reason the plot of Guardians 1 happened was that Captain Marvel couldn't spare another 2 minutes to take out Ronans entire fleet there and then.

Isn't that the problem with every movie as more superheroes get introduced? Where was Iron Man in Captain America 2, or Thor 2? Where was Thor in every movie that doesn't have Thor? Why did X didn't save the day in Y's movie? And so on.

Johnny Novgorod:

Silentpony:
Anything in this movie that I need to know for Avengers or its it kinda Ant Man like where I can skip it and the character just appears?

You get a backstory to the "Avengers" name and Carol's precise connection to Fury (ie. they teamed up in 1995). Also one of the Infinity Stones shows up for a wink. That's about it.

If that's all I don't mind waiting for it to come to Netflix

PsychedelicDiamond:

Here Comes Tomorrow:

PsychedelicDiamond:
Okay, real talk here:

The reason Disney is under constant attack by reactionaries doesn't have anything to do with their movies, their quality or their marketing. Disney is a fairly conservative company and always has been. The reason these reactionaries keep attacking Disney is because many Jews work there. In their eyes Disney is a Jewish company which is why it needs to be attacked.

That, for that matter, is the reason for most rightist attacks on the film industry in general. Not any concrete connection the industry has to their boogeyman of Cultural Marxism. Which, for the record, also means "anything involving jewish people"

Wow. I need to dig into leftist conspiracy theories more.

Oh, come on. Just read the discussion around Captain Marvel or practically any new Star Wars movie and count how many times (((some person))) does that cute little "triple brackets" thing rightists use to mark the names of people or companies they think are jewish.

Are you positive these people actually hate the jews and aren't just writing in that way cause they know it upsets people like you?

I mean, I don't know for sure that they are, but it sounds a lot more plausible to me. If you are someone who acknowledges how dumb anti-jew conspiracy theories such as them controlling the movie industry are, you should extend that understanding to all sorts of conspiracy theories, even ones against you personally.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here